http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47148
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47051
Joost VandeVondele changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Summary|Wrong
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47151
Summary: Parsing error
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
Reported
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47151
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
--- Comment #2 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 13:25:37 UTC ---
Here is a variant which gives the same error message:
MODULE a
TYPE, ABSTRACT :: t
CONTAINS
PROCEDURE, NOPASS :: pp => s
END TYPE
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE s()
END SU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 13:33:50 UTC ---
Some related non-OOP examples:
module a
contains
subroutine s()
end subroutine
end module
module s
use a
contains
subroutine sub()
call s
end subroutine
end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
--- Comment #4 from Daniel Franke 2011-01-02
13:47:41 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Some related non-OOP examples:
[...]
> Are these examples actually valid or invalid? Can someone give the relevant
> quotes from the standard?
Lahey's onlin
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39939
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46589
Kai Tietz changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ktietz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #7 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 14:46:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Some related non-OOP examples:
> [...]
> > Are these examples actually valid or invalid? Can someone give the relevant
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
--- Comment #6 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 15:19:10 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> > It
> > doesn't know OOP to test, but one could think that my initial example is
> > invalid after all?!
>
> I agree that it may be invalid, but o
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords|rejects-valid |accepts-invalid
--- Comment #7
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47136
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|[OOP] possible name |local identifier shall not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
--- Comment #4 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 15:58:13 UTC ---
Reduced test case:
type t
end type
type, extends(t) :: t2
integer, allocatable :: a
end type
class(t), allocatable :: x, y
allocate(t2 :: x)
allocate(y, source=x)
end
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
--- Comment #5 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 16:24:00 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> x%a should get default-initialized to NULL via the memcpy call from
> x._vptr->_def_init. The memcpy itself is done alright, but apparently the
> _d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47028
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-01-02
17:07:18 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Jan 2 17:07:15 2011
New Revision: 168401
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168401
Log:
PR rtl-optimization/47028
* cfgexpand.c (gi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47140
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-01-02
17:09:11 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Sun Jan 2 17:09:08 2011
New Revision: 168402
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168402
Log:
PR tree-optimization/47140
* tree-ssa-ccp.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46926
Andrew Haley changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46589
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #8 from
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47028
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47140
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47138
--- Comment #2 from Richard Guenther 2011-01-02
17:50:02 UTC ---
The rev. doesn't have a testcase (and it didn't fix a bug?).
If you have a testcase that shows this patch fixes a regression it is ok
to backport. If it fixes a wrong-code bug the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||sfilippone at uniroma2 dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47085
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47137
--- Comment #3 from hjl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02
17:54:24 UTC ---
Author: hjl
Date: Sun Jan 2 17:54:22 2011
New Revision: 168407
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168407
Log:
Don't check have_o when settting combine_inp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47137
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46942
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends on||42324
--- Comment #4 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-02 1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46942
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47138
--- Comment #3 from Eric Botcazou 2011-01-02
18:18:23 UTC ---
> The rev. doesn't have a testcase (and it didn't fix a bug?).
See http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-04/msg00056.html
nction-sections -fdata-sections -quiet -dumpbase dp-bit.c -march=v10
-mbest-lib-options -auxbase-strip _addsub_df.o -g -g -g -O2 -O2 -O2 -Wextra
-Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wold-style-definition -version -fno-stack-protector -o dp-bit.s
GNU
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47152
--- Comment #1 from aesok at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 18:28:10 UTC ---
Created attachment 22881
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22881
dp-bit.i
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47138
--- Comment #4 from Peter A. Bigot 2011-01-02 18:33:21
UTC ---
Exactly: this problem also occurs with the TI msp430 target machine
description, currently maintained as a fork on the mspgcc project on
sourceforge. I don't know how to provide a te
2 -Wextra
> -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wcast-qual -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
> -Wold-style-definition -version -fno-stack-protector -o dp-bit.s
> GNU C (GCC) version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) [trunk revision 152933]
Are you sure your GCC tree is up to date?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46942
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2011-01-02
19:01:58 UTC ---
And upper 32 bits are undefined if the argument is 8/16/32 bit (i.e. callee
must sign/zero extend, instead of caller)?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
--- Comment #7 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 19:02:31 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > x%a should get default-initialized to NULL via the memcpy call from
> > x._vptr->_def_init. The memcpy itself is done a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47056
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|una
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #17 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 19:28:33 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> Maybe it is really time to use hashed strings? One could void them for strings
> which are shorter and only hash for longer strings (starting with
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
Summary: g++ with -O3 enters infinite loop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |WAITING
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
Zdenek Sojka changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zsojka at seznam dot cz
--- Comment #2 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47152
--- Comment #3 from aesok at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 20:47:22 UTC ---
> > GNU C (GCC) version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) [trunk revision 152933]
>
>
02- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) (GCC)
[reg...@gamow tmp437]$ cat small.c
static int
foo (int si1, short si2)
{
return ((si1 ^ si2) & ((si1 ^ (si1 ^ si2) & ~2147483647) - si2 ^ si2)) <
0 ? si1 : si1 - si2;
}
struct S0
{
const
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46942
--- Comment #6 from H.J. Lu 2011-01-02 20:53:12
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> And upper 32 bits are undefined if the argument is 8/16/32 bit (i.e. callee
> must sign/zero extend, instead of caller)?
If callee wants 64bit, it has to sign/zer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
--- Comment #9 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 21:01:53 UTC ---
Author: janus
Date: Sun Jan 2 21:01:50 2011
New Revision: 168409
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168409
Log:
2011-01-02 Janus Weil
PR fortran/4
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46408
janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45827
--- Comment #43 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-01-02 21:27:48 UTC ---
Hans, does r168302 fix the problem for you, or do you still get "Component not
found" errors?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47154
Summary: [4.6 Regression] END= does not work in namelist read
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47154
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45338
--- Comment #5 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-02
21:58:06 UTC ---
Author: tkoenig
Date: Sun Jan 2 21:58:03 2011
New Revision: 168410
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=168410
Log:
2011-02-01 Thomas Koenig
Backport from ma
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45338
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Configured with: /export/gnu/import/git/gcc/configure --enable-languages=c
--disable-bootstrap --prefix=/usr/gcc-4.6.0 --with-local-prefix=/usr/local
--with-fpmath=sse
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) (GCC)
xgcc: fatal error
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47051
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||32834
--- Comment #11 from Thomas Koenig
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47147
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||build
Status|UNCONFIRMED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47137
--- Comment #6 from Richard Guenther 2011-01-02
22:43:38 UTC ---
Yes, flag_wpa is not set (as I said) for non-WHOPR mode. We don't have a
flag to identify non-WHOPR link-time.
64-unknown-linux-gnu
> Configured with: ../configure --with-libelf=/usr/local --enable-lto
> --prefix=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r168402-install
> --program-prefix=r168402- --enable-languages=c,c++
> Thread model: posix
> gcc version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) (GCC)
>
&g
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=37131
--- Comment #14 from Thomas Koenig 2011-01-02
23:20:07 UTC ---
Created attachment 22883
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22883
matmul loops that vectorize
Here's how we could make the different matmul loops look like
for diffe
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
--- Comment #3 from panagopoulosalexandrou at hotmail dot com 2011-01-03
01:52:09 UTC ---
Sorry, forget about the found_one thing. Maybe the prompt is confusing; the
.923.8.1...1.7.4...658.6.5.2...4.7.9.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
Jonathan Wakely changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |NEW
Known to work|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47153
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2011-01-03 02:36:27
UTC ---
You are accessing an array out of bounds:
--- sudoku_solver_single.cpp2011-01-03 03:30:35.0 +0100
+++ sudoku_solver_single2.cpp 2011-01-03 03:33:28.0 +0100
@@ -15
=/home/regehr/z/compiler-install/gcc-r168402-install
--program-prefix=r168402- --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.6.0 20110102 (experimental) (GCC)
[reg...@gamow tmp438]$ cat small.c
static unsigned int g_1;
static signed char g_2 = 0x81;
int printf(const char *format
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47156
Summary: obj-c++.dg/try-catch-[2|9].mm -fgnu-runtime failures
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: objc++
Assigned
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47154
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.5.3
Known to fail|
63 matches
Mail list logo
